Feed on


We only hear the story from the side of Big Pharma and the jaundiced view of the mainstream media.
Here is another side of the debate which you will probably look long and hard to find in the media. Don’t hold your breath while you look….

Sweden outlaws coercive mandatory vaccines laws, citing violations of the Swedish Constitution

Image: Sweden outlaws coercive mandatory vaccines laws, citing violations of the Swedish Constitution

(Natural News) It would seem that Sweden’s Parliament truly cares about doing what is best for its people. Rather than bowing to pressure by pharmaceutical companies or the scare-tactics of the mainstream media, the Swedish government recently adopted a decision to refuse to enforce the compulsory or mandatory vaccination of its citizens. Such a mandate, they noted, would violate the country’s Constitution.

Other factors also influenced the decision. For one thing, many people had called politicians or the Parliament directly to express their outrage at the concept of forced vaccinations. The text of one of the motions related to the decision noted that Parliamentary politicians had observed “massive resistance to all forms of coercion with regard to vaccination.”

The politicians also cited data from NHF Sweden which revealed frequent and “serious adverse reactions” to the MMR vaccine, and noted that such reactions are warned about in the vaccine package inserts. The politicians noted that since children would be expected to receive two doses of this vaccination, these considerable risks would be doubled. They also stressed that such risks were not limited to the MMR vaccine, but that other vaccines caused “similar adverse reactions.”

The Parliamentarians also referenced the additives found in these vaccines, which in their words, “are not health food and certainly [do] not belong in babies or children.”

And how right they are! Natural News previously reported on some of these unhealthy and downright disgusting ingredients:

  • Bovine cow serum
  • Sorbitol
  • Gelatin
  • Sodium chloride
  • Thimerosal
  • Human albumin
  • Other nasty ingredients like formaldehyde (yep, that’s embalming fluid), aluminum phosphate and MSG – not to mention fibroblast cells from aborted human fetuses, and African Green Monkey kidney cells!

But we need vaccinations or we’ll all die of diseases like measles, right? All those unvaccinated people are putting the herd immunity of the community as a whole at risk, aren’t they?

Well, in researching this article I found two very interesting sources of information from the mainstream media, which when looked at collectively, provide some real insight into the way our thinking is being manipulated on this issue.

Let’s first consider an article by NBC News entitled 7 Vaccine Myths Debunked by Doctors. One of the “myths” they supposedly debunk is the idea that “more people die from the vaccine than from measles.” They claim that while measles kills 140,000 people around the world each year, only 57 claims of death from the measles vaccine have ever been filed with the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). Now, it’s interesting to note that this article looks at deaths worldwide, but only cites vaccine death rates for the United States, where the VICP was established in 1986.

Let’s move on to the second article talking about the evils of measles. This article by Very Well actually does give the number of people who died from measles in the U.S.A. The article only gives figures as far back as 2000, but angrily proclaims that there have been 11 measles deaths since that year.

So, the one article tells us that 57 measles vaccine death claims have been filed with VICP (presumably since 1986), while the other tells us that a grand total of 11 people died from the disease itself between 2000 and 2015. Even if we were to double that number to account for the years between 1986 and 2000 (taking it from 11 to 22), that would still mean that more than twice as many people died from the measles vaccine than from actual measles!

And yet Big Pharma and the self-righteous mainstream media continue to bully us into vaccinating our children for the “greater good!”

Fortunately, more and more people are becoming informed about the very real dangers of vaccination, and are weighing those dangers against the comparatively smaller risks associated with contracting diseases like measles.

And, hopefully other countries will follow Sweden’s example and refuse to force their citizens to vaccinate their children. Follow more news on health freedom at HealthFreedom.news.


 Is this a positive advance or just another step in creating more unemployment??

Dubai’s first ‘Robocop’ begins patrolling streets

Dubai’s first ‘Robocop’ begins patrolling streets
The world’s first robot policeman has officially joined Dubai’s police force. While it’s not exactly the Robocop from the movie, officers in the United Arab Emirates may want to get used to them, as the bots may soon account for a quarter of their colleagues.

The autonomous Robocop entered the line of duty on Sunday by greeting guests and patrolling the halls at the three-day Gulf Information Security Expo and Conference (GISEC). Plans are in place to have the machine on the streets in popular Dubai areas when the expo ends on Tuesday evening.

“With an aim to assist and help people in the malls or on the streets, the Robocop is the latest smart addition to the force and has been designed to help us fight crime, keep the city safe and improve happiness levels,” said Brigadier-General Khalid Nasser Al Razzouqi, Director-General of Smart Services with the Dubai Police.

“He can chat and interact, respond to public queries, shake hands and offer a military salute,” he added.

READ MORE: Robocops to join Dubai police force by May

Standing at a height of 5 feet, 5 inches (1.7 meters) and weighing in at 220lbs (100kg), the Robocop can read a person’s facial expressions and react accordingly in six languages. It can also transmit and receive messages from police, and has a built-in tablet that can be used to pay fines and report crimes.


View image on TwitterView image on Twitter


“The launch of the world’s first operational Robocop is a significant milestone for the Emirate and a step towards realizing Dubai’s vision to be a global leader in smart cities technology adoption,” said Brigadier-General Razzouqi.

READ MORE: RoboCop: Police use AI to judge whether suspects are jailed or bailed

The models, which were first unveiled at the Gulf Information Technology Exhibition (GITEX) in 2015, are a central part of Dubai’s plan to create a city that generates half of its own power.

The ambitious self-power plan calls for adopting smart police mechanisms, which would include police stations manned entirely by robots.

The life and times of the WWW

Imagine you’re trying to learn about cats using a computer. You do a keyword search, only… nothing comes up. Perhaps you’re not using the right keywords? Are you sure the information is even on this computer? Finally, someone gives you a floppy disk, but it turns out your computer can’t read it, so you go to a different computer. Now you have a new problem: you have no idea how to use the software. You give up on all this computer stuff and ask someone to teach you about cats over a cup of coffee.

Welcome to sharing information in 1989. Thankfully it’s not that hard these days, thanks to Tim Berners-Lee and the invention of the World Wide Web, an application that is crucial to viewing content shared over the Internet.

Let’s take a look at just how much the WWW changed the internet that we use today.


Invention of the World Wide Web

Back in 1989, Tim was working at the European research organization CERN and noticed how hard it was to share information. Information was also lost easily when people left the organisation. So, Tim proposed a flexible solution using a system called hypertext, which would be available on any computer, no matter where you were stationed in CERN.

At first, nobody else really “got it” – they said it sounded “vague but exciting” – and it never became an official CERN project. However, Tim was given some time to work on it in September 1990. By the end of that year, Tim had already built:

  • HTML (HyperText Markup Language) – the language web pages are written in
  • URI (Uniform Resource Identifier) – the most common type of which is a URL or “web address”
  • HTTP (HyperText Transfer Protocol)
  • The first Web Editor/Browser (WorldWideWeb) to understand all of the above so you can see and edit web pages
  • The first web server
  • The first web page

Tim called the project the “WorldWideWeb” and invited people outside of CERN to join as well. As participation grew, Tim realised it would need to be free in order to reach its full potential:

“Had the technology been proprietary, and in my total control, it would probably not have taken off. You can’t propose that something be a universal space and at the same time keep control of it.”

On 30 April 1993, CERN agreed that the WorldWideWeb should be available royalty-free, forever, and released the underlying code.


Early Adoption of the WorldWideWeb

Interest in the WorldWideWeb took off almost immediately, with an explosion of new web pages and tools to browse the web. The Mosaic web browser was released, making the web easier to use by displaying images in-line (instead of in a new window). The world’s first webcam appeared – The Trojan Room Coffee Pot – which became a popular feature of the early Web. We even have our own!

As the web exploded in popularity, early search engines like Infoseek, AltaVista, and Yahoo! were created to make it easier to find information. These were simple directories – Google would later come along and blitz the competition with search algorithms.

By 1994, commercialisation on the internet had already begun, with banner ads starting to appear. Amazon.com launched the same year, originally selling just books. Websites were also made to promote products – the amazing Space Jam website IS STILL AROUND!

As well as commercial sites, online communities appeared from groups of personal web pages hosted on GeoCities and Tripod. As the “neighbourhoods” on GeoCities grew, the “homesteaders” built tools to connect their sites and to talk to one another. Use of chat rooms, web rings, guest books, internet forums, and online journals increased as a way to connect with each other.


The great dot-com burst of 1999

In the late nineties, businesses started jumping on the web in a big way. A lot of wacky companies started appearing like pets.com, and beenz.com, which attempt to establish an online currency comprised of loyalty points that could be spent with participating merchants (think FlyBuys).

Unfortunately, a “get large or get lost” mentality that prioritised growth over profit lead many of these companies to go belly-up after burning through their venture capital.

Meanwhile, the internet was evolving socially. GeoCities communities gave way to bigger Internet forums, and early journal tools like LiveJournal. Some of the biggest forums are still around now. Something Awful (a NSFW comedy community) and Whirlpool (an Australian broadband community) were founded only one month apart in 1998/1999. As forums became bigger, they influenced internet culture, with memes like All Your Base spreading rapidly.


Web 2.0

As the building blocks of the Web became more sophisticated, it became possible to build software and advanced interactive tools. The Web was no longer just a way to transport text and graphics – it was a platform with software applications built into it.

Commercial websites immediately took advantage of these new capabilities, including eBay and Amazon’s online department store. There was a big focus on making online purchases easy and improving payment security.

New interactive tools also led to early social networking. Social networking sites started building on older community technologies like forums, internet journals (now called blogs) and chat rooms, mixing and matching features to make it easy for anyone to set up their own space on the Web. Friendster was the first major social network, then MySpace, later followed by Facebook and Twitter.

Interactivity also made it easier for people to add their own content to the web, and user-edited content quickly became popular. This wasn’t limited to creative and expressive spaces such as YouTube, WordPress and Flickr. Wikipedia launched in 2001 and would later become the world’s largest online encyclopedia.

This trend towards information and social networking combined with people’s enthusiasm for creating their own content paved the way for websites which offered combinations of features. Two examples which are still going strong today are Reddit, which is both a forum and a news aggregator, and Tumblr, which combines blogging, photo and video sharing.


The Web Goes Mobile (Web 3.0)

As time went on, web access became increasingly flexible. 2007 marked the release of the original iPhone, which set off a trend of touchscreen smartphones in the market. While the web was technically accessible on older mobile phones, smartphones made it much easier and user-friendly.

By the beginning of 2014, mobile use had exceeded the use of desktop computers. Today it’s unthinkable for any serious website not to have a mobile-friendly version.


Where to from here?

Today, the WorldWideWeb is an integral part of many people’s daily lives, and the number of users is only increasing. However, even though we interact with it every day, the “real world” and “the web” are still almost two separate worlds.

Perhaps this will change as interest in virtual and augmented reality grows. Games like Pokémon GO and Ingress overlay WorldWideWeb information on top of real-world locations… with some inappropriate results. WebVR, another emerging technology, promises to bring virtual reality to your web browser, creating new shared spaces.

As these services become more common, it’ll be important to add information to, or place limits on, the real-world locations they include. Mixed Reality Services are one proposed solution – a way to match real-world locations with web addresses. In any case, what we have today sure beats floppy disks!

Big Pharma Company in Painful Court Decision….

Nurofen manufacturer Reckitt Benckiser fined $6 million for misleading customers after failed High Court appeal

ABC News

The manufacturer of Nurofen has been ordered to pay a $6 million fine for misleading consumers with its specific pain relief range, after the High Court rejected its appeal.

Last year, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) won its case against Reckitt Benckiser.

The Federal Court found the products were misleading because they all contained the same active ingredient and did the same thing, despite claims they targeted different parts of the body.

The company was initially fined $1.7 million, but that was increased to $6 million after the consumer watchdog appealed.

It is the biggest ever fine for breaching Australian consumer law.

Reckitt Benckiser said it was “disappointed by the decision”.

“Nurofen did not intend to mislead consumers and we apologise to those of our consumers who were misled,” the company said in a statement.

“We recognise that we could have done more to assist our consumers in navigating the Nurofen specific pain range.

“That is, to show that each of the products in the range is equally effective for the other pains indicated on the Nurofen specific pain range packaging.”

The company said it had already paid the penalty in accordance with court orders made in December.

Between 2011 and 2015 the company sold 5.9 million packets of the specific pain medication, yielding revenue of $45 million.

The specific pain range claimed to “target” back pain, migraine, tension headache or period pain, when they in fact they all contained the same active ingredient, ibuprofen lysine 342mg.

These pain specific Nurofen packages were set at a significant price premium to regular Nurofen.

There were various representations made on Nurofen’s website that were also found to be misleading.

In December 2015, the Federal Court ordered that all Nurofen specific pain products be removed from retail sale within three months, and the company post corrective notices in newspapers and on its website.


Germany Converts Coal Mine Into Giant Battery Storage for Surplus Solar and Wind Power
Tuesday, 21 March 2017
Article reprinted with permission from EcoWatch
Germany is embarking on an innovative project to turn a hard coal mine into a giant battery that can store surplus solar and wind energy and release it when supplies are lean.
The Prosper-Haniel coal mine in the German state of North-Rhine Westphalia will be converted into a 200 megawatt pumped-storage hydroelectric reservoir that acts like a giant battery. The capacity is enough to power more than 400,000 homes, Governor Hannelore Kraft said, according to Bloomberg.
Founded in 1863, the Prosper-Haniel coal mine produces 3,000,000t/y of coal and is one of the few active coal mines remaining in Germany. But the mine is slated for closure in 2018, when federal subsidies for the industry dry up.   Kraft said that the miners in the town of Bottrop will remain employed at the site as it converts to its new function.   Pumped-storage facilities are not a new idea, as such systems are already in operation around the world. However, this is the first time that a coal mine will be used as part of the infrastructure.
Engadget explained how such a facility would work:
Similar to a standard hydroelectric power plant, pumped hydroelectric storage stations generate power by releasing water from a reservoir through a turbine to a second reservoir at a lower altitude. Rather than releasing the outflow, however, the water is then stored in the lower reservoir until it can be pumped back up to the top reservoir using cheaper, off-peak power or another renewable energy source. In the case of the Prosper-Haniel plant, the lower reservoir will be made up of more than 16 miles of mine shafts that reach up to 4,000 feet (1,200 meters) deep. The station’s 200 megawatts of hydroelectric power would fit into a mix of biomass, solar and wind power. It’s not a perpetual motion machine, but the water stored in the surface reservoir will effectively act as a backup “battery” that could kick in and fill any gaps in the energy mix whenever the other sources fall short.
Germany’s ambitious “Energiewende,” or energy transition, aims for at least an 80 percent share of renewables by 2050, with intermediate targets of 35 to 40 percent share by 2025 and 55 to 60 percent by 2035.   The country is well on track, as renewables supplied nearly 33 percent of German electricity in 2015, according to Agora Energiewende.
Germany has such an impressive renewable energy mix that last year, on a particularly windy and sunny day, so much power was generated that people were paid to use it.
And while that’s good news for the environment and German consumers alike, renewable energy has a well known storage problem. The electricity produced by, say, wind turbines or solar panels must be used or else it’s lost. On the flip side, renewables might not be able to meet demand on cloudy days with no wind.  Batteries, working as pumped-storage facilities, are a promising solution to this problem, since they store excess renewable energy on productive days and discharge it during energy shortfalls.
“We have a very sympathetic ear” to sustainable and cost-effective storage, Governor Kraft said in a March 14 speech in Dusseldorf.
More mines could be converted into industrial-scale storage facilities as North-Rhine Westphalia seeks to double the share of renewables in its power mix to 30 percent by 2025, Kraft said.

Monsanto on trial for Roundup cancer

Source: Nexus Newsfeed.com

“For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus.”

These words, penned in 2013 by former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientist Marion Copley, have an urgency seldom found in the dry correspondence that is typically passed between scientists. But this was no ordinary memo; it was an appeal, a desperate plea for action. And it was written on her death bed. The letter is addressed to Jess Rowland, at that time the head of the EPA’s Cancer Assessment Review Committee (CARC). It begins by noting 14 separate effects of glyphosate (a herbicide marketed by Monsanto under the name “Roundup”) known to the EPA.

As Copley explains in the letter, “any one of these mechanisms alone listed can cause tumors, but glyphosate causes all of them simultaneously.” She argues that the CARC should change its assessment of glyphosate from a “possible cause of cancer” to the more definitive “probable human carcinogen.” And she excoriates Rowland himself, noting that his “trivial MS degree from 1971 Nebraska is far outdated” and that as a result CARC science is 10 years behind the literature. She charges Rowland and his colleague, Anna Lowit, with intimidating staff and changing reports to favor industry interests. And she ends with these haunting words:

“I have cancer and I don’t want these serious issues in HED [the Health Effects Division] to go unaddressed before I go to my grave. I have done my duty.”

She may have done her duty, but she did not get her wish. Just nine months later she was dead, and the EPA still listed glyphosate as a “possible” carcinogen.

Copley’s letter is just one of the many dramatic pieces of evidence submitted as part of a new filing in a class action lawsuit against Monsanto that is currently before the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California. The lawsuit alleges that Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer (now officially the most-used agricultural chemical of all time!) is responsible for the non-Hodgkin lymphoma of thousands of people across the country.

Independent scientists, natural health activists and even government agencies have been warning of glyphosate’s dangerous effects on human health for years, but, as Corbett Reporteers will remember, the herbicide came under special scrutiny in 2015, when the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) officially declared it a “probable human carcinogen,” the same status Dr. Copley was arguing for in her 2013 letter to the EPA. Since then, dozens of lawsuits have been filed against Monsanto blaming the company’s Roundup weed killer for their cancer. In October 2016, the cases were consolidated into a single trial, “IN RE: ROUNDUP PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION” (MDL No. 2742, Case No. 16-md-02741-VC).

The latest remarkable twist in this sordid courtroom drama is that Jess Rowland, the recipient of Dr. Copley’s terminal letter, will likely be compelled to testify in the case after having been subpoenaed by the plaintiffs. Last year a CARC report declaring glyphosate “Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans” was mysteriously leaked and then retracted, but not before it was used by Monsanto to “refute” the WHO’s assessment. The report bore Rowland’s signature, and he retired from the agency just days after the “inadvertent” leak.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, presiding over the case, did not mince words, declaring Rowland’s actions and his likely collusion with Monsanto to be “highly suspicious” and adding,

“When you consider the relevance of the EPA’s reports, and you consider their relevance to this litigation, it seems appropriate to take Jess Rowland’s deposition.”

So as things sit, it is very likely that the former head of the EPA’s cancer review board will be sitting on a very hot seat in a California court room answering some uncomfortable questions about his relationship with Monsanto. The case may not only open the door for thousands of cancer victims in the US to achieve some restitution from the company they believe responsible for their condition, but may also blow the lid off of the EPA’s supposed impartiality when it comes to such assessments.

And as rewarding as these developments are in themselves, they in turn pay further dividends. Readers of this column will remember how Bayer AG is preparing to swallow Monsanto in an effort to further consolidate the already centralized agrochemical industry. But as Bloomberg notes, reporting on the pending testimony from Rowland:

The dramatic turn in the litigation comes less than a week after Bayer AG signaled that it may face delays in its deal to buy St. Louis-based Monsanto, the world’s largest seed company, for about $66 billion. Some investors have doubted the takeover will be approved due to regulatory concerns.

So BayerSanto may not happen after all, and there remains the possibility that the corporate heads of Monsanto may one day face justice for their crimes. It’s hard to imagine “good news” and “Monsanto” appearing in the same news story, but this may be a rare example.


Some electronic energy meters can give false readings that are up to 582% higher than actual energy consumption. This emerged from a study carried out by the University of Twente (UT), in collaboration with the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (AUAS). Professor Frank Leferink of the UT estimates that potentially inaccurate meters have been installed in the meter cabinets of at least 750,000 Dutch households. The article is published in the scientific journal IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility Magazine.
In the Netherlands, traditional energy meters (kWh) – the familiar energy meter with a rotating disc – are being increasingly replaced by electronic variants (which are also known as ‘static energy meters’). One well-known variant of the latter is the ‘smart meter’. The Dutch government wants smart meters in every household by 2020.
Actual consumption
For quite some time now, rumours have been rife about electronic energy meters that give excessively high readings in practice. This prompted Prof. Leferink to investigate electronic meters, to see whether they can indeed give false readings. Together with co-workers Cees Keyer and Anton Melentjev from AUAS, he tested nine different electronic meters in this study. The meters in question were manufactured between 2004 and 2014. The meters were connected, via an electric switchboard, to a range of power-consuming appliances, such as energy saving light bulbs, heaters, LED bulbs and dimmers. The researchers then compared the actual consumption of the system with the electronic energy meter’s readings.
582 percent
In the experiments (which were entirely reproducible), five of the nine meters gave readings that were much higher than the actual amount of power consumed. Indeed, in some setups, these were up to 582 percent higher. Conversely, two of the meters gave readings that were 30 percent lower than the actual amount of power consumed.   The greatest inaccuracies were seen when dimmers combined with energy saving light bulbs and LED bulbs were connected to the system. According to Mr Keyer (lecturer Electrical Engineering at the AUAS and PhD student at the UT) “OK, these were laboratory tests, but we deliberately avoided using exceptional conditions. For example, a dimmer and 50 bulbs, while an average household has 47 bulbs.”
Source:    University of Twente

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply